Ripcache, a pseudonymous artist, explores themes of surveillance and privacy through a 1-bit pixelated aesthetic. By examining the impact of modern surveillance in centralized and decentralized systems, Ripcache’s work examines the tradeoffs of the advancing digital age. Their recent series, ‘Hyperscalers’, was featured on the main stage at Bitcoin Amsterdam, with a private sale facilitated by UTXO Management’s OTC desk to collector Brissi, marking a major milestone in their career and the larger ordinals ecosystem.
We sat down with Ripcache to discuss his art.
Ordinals on Bitcoin are creating new ways for the public to interact with digital art. In a world increasingly dominated by surveillance, how does this impact your views on ownership, visibility and control of art?
Ordinals challenge the status quo on ownership and control. In a sense, they democratize access to certain forms of art. In the past, much of the art world revolved around exclusivity. Works of art hidden in private collections or in warehouses, only accessible to a select group. This exclusivity is like a centralized database with limited access.
In contrast, inscribing art on bitcoin makes it universally accessible. Sure, you may still not own it, but anyone with an internet connection can at least view it and verify the work without any intermediaries. This accessibility and transparency challenges traditional power structures in art ownership and curation. That said, in an age of ubiquitous surveillance, this openness also raises questions around privacy and the potential for art and provenance to be co-opted or misused. It’s a delicate balance between visibility and control and advocating for a future where art is both accessible and respectful of individual privacy (for the artist, collector and the wider public).
How do you see the relationship between art and surveillance evolving as technologies like blockchain and AI continue to shape the future of digital art? Could AI offer an alternative story to the world we live in, or just deepen it?
AI and blockchain are actively changing our perception of surveillance and privacy. Although AI has enormous creative potential, as it can enable new forms of creation and interaction, it also comes with risks. The biggest risk is increasing surveillance capabilities by collecting and processing enormous amounts of data, predicting behavior and potentially suppressing spontaneity.
However, it is difficult to say definitively. AI could deepen the surveillance state, but it also has the potential to provide alternatives. Artists are already using AI to explore themes of privacy and identity, regaining some control over the narrative. And maybe it’s a bit cliché, but I think crypto and bitcoin offer a counterbalance by enabling decentralized and increasingly anonymous interactions. Ordinals allow artists to share their work with collectors around the world without centralized oversight, promoting a culture of openness while safeguarding individual freedoms. As these technologies evolve, I think it’s critical that we actively shape them to increase rather than diminish our creative and personal freedoms.
Incorporating motifs like CCTV and drones into your work raises questions about the tension between the peer-to-peer aspect of Bitcoin and the ubiquity of surveillance. Are you concerned that systems intended to decentralize power are still being co-opted by regulatory forces or contributing to an increasingly digital panopticon?
The risk of decentralized systems being co-opted is a real concern. My use of motifs such as closed-circuit television cameras and drones is an attempt to emphasize this tension. These symbols represent the watchful eyes of surveillance, prompting viewers to consider how technologies intended for empowerment can be repurposed for control.
Financial transparency about bitcoin is empowering. It has the potential to hold institutions accountable, but it can also expose personal data if not managed carefully. There is a paradox where greater openness can lead to reduced individual privacy. To prevent decentralization from contributing to a digital panopticon, it is important to advocate for technologies that prioritize user privacy, such as zero-knowledge proofs, and to remain vigilant about regulatory developments.
Art can play a role in this discourse by bringing these issues to the cultural forefront and encouraging proactive engagement with the cypherpunk ethos and the second and third order implications of technology.